ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Sample Answer for ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100 Included After Question

As noted by Dr. Stanley and Dr. White in this week’s media presentation, professional nurses should be engaging in advocacy efforts to improve health and nursing practice through involvement in the policy process at the institutional, local, state, or federal levels. This array of possibilities for involvement provides opportunities for all nurses, regardless of time, or other possible constraints. Successful policy making is a collaborative effort, and one that commands mutual respect from all involved. Your involvement in policy making can lead to expanded opportunities as both a nurse leader and as a respected member of an interprofessional health care team.

Note: This Discussion provides a forum for discussing advocacy opportunities and honing your presentation skills in a small group setting.

To prepare:

Reflect on the insights offered by Dr. Stanley and Dr. White on engaging in advocacy through the policy process.
Identify a practice issue that is of interest to you and that could benefit from advocacy efforts through the policy process.
Consider the stakeholders and any special interest or professional organizations that would support your issue.
Develop a short, yet persuasive PowerPoint (up to 3 slides) as follows:
- Identify the practice issue that would benefit from being addressed through the policy process
- Represent the key stakeholders (i.e. use graphical images when possible)
- Propose one strategy for how a nurse could advocate for this issue

The PowerPoint should be succinct, visually appealing, and effective.

By Day 4

Post your PowerPoint presentation.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.

By Day 6

Review each group member’s PowerPoint presentation and offer constructive feedback on:

Style and quality of the PowerPoint
Persuasiveness
Clarity
Representation of stakeholders, such as additional individuals/groups that could be included
Strategy proposal

Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues.

ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

Week 11 Discussion 2 Rubric

Post by Day 4 and Respond by Day 6

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 11 Discussion 2

Week in Review

In this final week, you assessed implications of various policy options and solutions of health care and nursing practice and outlined evidence that supports suggested options and solutions to a policy issue. You also proposed and advocacy strategy that nurses may employ to address a practice issue through the policy process.

Congratulations! After you have finished all of the assignments for this week, you have completed the course. Please submit your Course Evaluation by Day 7.

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Title: ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Nurse-Led Discharge planning to Reduce Readmissions

The nurse-led discharge planning is a process that can benefit from advocacy in healthcare settings. The process support the reduction of readmission policy and comprises of different interventions (Qui et al, 2021). Key among them include having daily rounds to identity those to be discharged next and any potential difficulties that they may have, provision of written instruction on discharge and providing pre-scheduled follow up visits to the outpatient unit and the physicians in-charge (Chaka et al., 2019). The process also entails involvement of patients and caregivers in planning and decision-making that comprise of patient education and a better understanding of the discharge process.

Stakeholders

The stakeholders in this process include the patients and their families or caregivers, nurses, physicians and pharmacists. The case manager, the nutritionists and even the healthcare organization and its management are also critical stakeholders in this process. Through them, it is possible to advocate for changes in policy processes to improve the Readmission Reduction policy’s outcomes.

Nurse-Led Discharge Process

The multidisciplinary team will comprise of different professionals with well-documented roles and responsibilities. The team will conduct discharge planning with the patient and family through educating them using layman’s language (Vernon et al., 2019). For instance, the physician will discuss the management of the disease and prognosis while the nurse will offer education on medication and administration of medicines (Mabire et al., 2018). The pharmacist will review medications before discharge while the case manager will ensure that all home needs that the patient requires are available. The nutritionist or dietitian will discuss effective and appropriate food options for the patients.

Conclusion

The use of multidisciplinary approach in rounds on a constant basis improve the ability of the facility to address barriers to effective patient management. Secondly, it improves patient compliance to treatment upon discharge and reduces readmissions that are costly, especially when not done sufficiently. The process reduces the cost of care and improves clinical outcomes. The implication is that advocating for this process imprpvement allows the facility to attain the goals of its Readmission Reduction policy.

References

Chaka, R., Karki, N., Ketlogetswe, K., & Ayala, T. (2019). Multidisciplinary

rounds in prevention of 30-day readmissions and decreasing length

of stay in heart failure patients: A community hospital based

retrospective study. 98(27). doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016233.

Mabire, C., Dwyer, A., Garnier, A., & Pellet, J. (2018). Meta-analysis of the

effectiveness of nursing discharge planning interventions for older

inpatients discharged home. Journal of Advanced Nursing 74(4),788–799.

Qiu, X., Lan, C., Li, J., Xiao, X., & Li, J. (2021). The effect of nurse-led

interventions on re-admission and mortality for congestive heart failure: A

meta-analysis. Medicine, 100(7). doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024599.

Vernon, D., Brown, J. E., Griffiths, E., Nevill, A. M., & Pinkney, M. (2019). Reducing

readmission rates through a discharge follow-up service. Future healthcare

journal, 6(2), 114. doi: 10.7861/futurehosp.6-2-114

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Title: ADVOCATING THROUGH POLICY NURS 8100

Practice Issue

Inadequate nurse staffing is a practice issue that could benefit from being addressed through the policy process. Nurse staffing is an issue of both personal and professional concern. Inappropriate nursing staffing levels threaten patient safety and compromise the quality of nursing care resulting in greater complexity of care (Griffiths et al., 2018). It also has a detrimental impact on nurses’ health and safety since it increases nurse work pressure, fatigue, and rate of injury and affects their ability to provide safe care. When there is inadequate staffing, nurses do not have adequate time to do everything needed for every patient. Consequently, a nurse’s moral obligations to patients are compromised due to work restraints and stress overload (Griffiths et al., 2018.

Key Stakeholders

Various stakeholders are responsible for seeing that hospitals have adequate nurse-to-patient ratios to promote patient safety and quality of nursing care. The stakeholders that would support the issue include individual nurses, hospital administrators, nurse managers, government legislative bodies and regulators, professional nursing organizations, and nursing accrediting agencies (Han et al., 2021).

Strategy a Nurse Could Use to Advocate For This Issue

A nurse can advocate for this issue by proposing a policy that will help address inadequate staffing in their state and presenting the policy to a state legislator. The nurse should research the impact of inadequate staffing on patients, nurses, healthcare organizations, and the healthcare system (Chiu et al., 2021). The research findings should be presented to the legislator to convince them of the need to enact a policy that will address the situation. In addition, the nurse should present the potential impact of the proposed policy in addressing the current challenges (Chiu et al., 2021). When presenting the policy to the legislator, the nurse should also highlight potential barriers to implementing the policy and offer solutions to mitigate these barriers.

References

Chiu, P., Cummings, G. G., Thorne, S., & Schick-Makaroff, K. (2021). Policy Advocacy and Nursing Organizations: A Scoping Review. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 22(4), 276–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/15271544211050611

Griffiths, P., Recio-Saucedo, A., Dall’Ora, C., Briggs, J., Maruotti, A., Meredith, P., Smith, G. B., Ball, J., & Missed Care Study Group (2018). The association between nurse staffing and omissions in nursing care: A systematic review. Journal of advanced nursing, 74(7), 1474–1487. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13564

Han, X., Pittman, P., & Barnow, B. (2021). Alternative Approaches to Ensuring Adequate Nurse Staffing: The Effect of State Legislation on Hospital Nurse Staffing. Medical care, 59(Suppl 5), S463–S470. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001614

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NURS_8100_Week11_Discussion1_Rubric

Grid View
List View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION	8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.	7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.	0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING	6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.	4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	0 (0%) – 3 (10%) Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30